April 20, 2017Cruz to Hold Hearing on Expanding American Free Enterprise in Space

WASHINGTON - U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), chairman of the Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness, will convene a hearing titled “Reopening the American Frontier: Reducing Regulatory Barriers and Expanding American Free Enterprise in Space” at 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, April 26, 2017. This hearing will examine the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act signed into law in November 2015, potential regulatory barriers to address in future legislation, and ways to expand commercial opportunities for American firms in space.

A representative from ULA is not on the list either, and ULA has specifically stated they need to have a higher amount of commercial business when they field their Vulcan launcher. Plus they have been promoting ACES for years, as well at IVF, as opening up new markets in space.

Other than launching smallsats, I don't think Virgin Galactic intends to go beyond sub-orbital, so they are not really oriented towards markets that are "in space" per se. They are highly visible in the public, but that doesn't make them a good representative for this topic.

My $0.02

Logged

If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

I would want a satellite manufacturer and service provider/operator on that list. Why ignore 90% of the industry?

Jurisdiction may play a role in this. Formally, most satellite service providers/operators are regulated by the FCC, which is overseen by the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, Innovation, and the Internet, rather than Science, Space and Competitiveness subcommittee.

The big place that satellite builders or operators are impacted within this area (on something like the CSLA) is for things like payload reviews during the launch licence (which arguably would also impact Made In Space, or Bigelow). And Bigelow does have experience with what is effectively a satellite (Genesis 1 & 2)

A lot of positive stuff was talked about, and they acknowledged that this was just a start. The important stuff I noticed:

- The Outer Space Treaty needs to be revisited and revised to reflect that humanity is now ready to expand out into space. Being an international agreement this won't change quickly, and it will be interesting to hear how the Trump Administration approaches this, given Trump's attitudes about international agreements in general.

- Industry wants increased funding for the Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) because they are concerned that a lack of funding could slow their future launch rates.

- Should there be a U.S. Government entity that does the job of on-orbit authority, space situational awareness or space traffic management?

- There is a lack of clarity regarding the future of the ISS, and what NASA will do after the ISS, which means the private sector doesn't have enough clarity to try and partner with or leverage NASA's future plans.

Did I miss anything?

Logged

If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

A lot of positive stuff was talked about, and they acknowledged that this was just a start. The important stuff I noticed:

- The Outer Space Treaty needs to be revisited and revised to reflect that humanity is now ready to expand out into space. Being an international agreement this won't change quickly, and it will be interesting to hear how the Trump Administration approaches this, given Trump's attitudes about international agreements in general.

That's interesting -- I'd have expected Cruz et al. to advocate simply abrogating the Treaty. Was any hint given as to why they want to keep it at all?

A lot of positive stuff was talked about, and they acknowledged that this was just a start. The important stuff I noticed:

- The Outer Space Treaty needs to be revisited and revised to reflect that humanity is now ready to expand out into space. Being an international agreement this won't change quickly, and it will be interesting to hear how the Trump Administration approaches this, given Trump's attitudes about international agreements in general.

That's interesting -- I'd have expected Cruz et al. to advocate simply abrogating the Treaty. Was any hint given as to why they want to keep it at all?

I would think that would be obvious. If you get rid of the OST, then nations can claim territory in space. We need a better environment for business in space, not an uncontrolled land grab that could lead to conflict.

A lot of positive stuff was talked about, and they acknowledged that this was just a start. The important stuff I noticed:

- The Outer Space Treaty needs to be revisited and revised to reflect that humanity is now ready to expand out into space. Being an international agreement this won't change quickly, and it will be interesting to hear how the Trump Administration approaches this, given Trump's attitudes about international agreements in general.

That's interesting -- I'd have expected Cruz et al. to advocate simply abrogating the Treaty. Was any hint given as to why they want to keep it at all?

I think I mixed facts with opinions, and caused confusion.

I only wanted to convey that Cruz thinks the Outer Space Treaty needs to be revised. The rest of my statement was personal opinion and observation.

"As we look to the future of American free enterprise and settlement in space, we should also thoroughly review the United Nations’ Outer Space Treaty, which was written and enacted in a very different time and era in 1967,” he said. “It’s important that Congress evaluate how that treaty, enacted 50 years ago, will impact new and innovative activity within space."

Logged

If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

I only wanted to convey that Cruz thinks the Outer Space Treaty needs to be revised.

That's how I took it. And, for my part, I did not mean to say that the OST should be done away with. I'm just a little surprised that Cruz doesn't want to get rid of it.

Quote

"As we look to the future of American free enterprise and settlement in space, we should also thoroughly review the United Nations’ Outer Space Treaty, which was written and enacted in a very different time and era in 1967,” he said. “It’s important that Congress evaluate how that treaty, enacted 50 years ago, will impact new and innovative activity within space."